Response # 5

Chaudry’s argues this issue with children being born into disadvantaged communities, is a public problem not a personal problem because the children are born into the families and do not get to chose. He also argues that many times the working poor have bee suppressed by the public and therefore, can not uplift themselves from the poor communities in which they have grown up in. In Annette and Aaron’s case, Annette grew up in the neighborhood in which she is raising her family. She dropped out of school at a young age to never go back and finish. The public problem that exists within the projects of cities is the fact that education does not play an important role within their society. With her low education achievement she receives low paying jobs that never give her the opportunity to bring her family out of the poverty state that live in. Another factor that is apparent that Chaudry argues is how the “projects” do not have adequate resources for working mothers to raise a family with. In the videos that presented many of them described or showed what the working poor class was, It also shoed why people fall into the working class poor. The two videos that really support Chaudry’s argument is the one with the gentlemen who once had a job and now is jobless looking for another job. The second was the one were the family was going to lose their house because the father lost his job due to his company moving things overseas. This shows how it is a public problem not a personal problem because; both of these persons had a job that was paying decent money and giving them a life style that was enjoyable. One family was able to buy a house and the wife was able to stay home and care for their children. The second gentlemen went from living in a two-bedroom apartment in a safe neighborhood, the basement in the projects and eating at local soup kitchens. All of these examples supports his argument on how it is a public problem not a personal one.